• Represented Chief Restructuring Advisor in major CCAA proceeding
• Served as lawyers' insurance defense counsel on several multi-million-dollar claims
• Represented more than 1,000 plaintiffs advancing Residential School claims against Canada and churches in Alberta mass tort action/national class action ($5B settlement)
• Managed the Field Law Residential Schools practice unit of ten counsel, seven paralegals and three assistants
• Served as litigation counsel to ski resort, newspaper, land developer, oil manufacturing and education clients
• Served as defense counsel in litigation involving major petrochemical fire losses (oil sands claims) ($1B, $250M)
• Served as defense counsel in partnership dispute ($15M)
• Defended major contractors and owners on construction and other complex litigation issues
• Represented plaintiffs in asbestos claim ($15M)
• Served as plaintiff and defense counsel in defamation/media litigation - individuals, newspapers, institutions and companies
• Represented major banking insurer in litigation and liquidation proceedings

Sunshine Village Corporation v. Attorney General of Canada, 2017 FC 846

• Where we began: Sunshine Village Corporation had general access right to the access road from Trans-Canada Highway, which it used for overflow parking for its ski resort. Parks Canada triggered a large avalanche that exceeded its runout boundaries and deposited 150m of debris on the Access Road in an area previously thought to be safe from avalanche risk. Shortly after the avalanche, the Parks Canada Superintendent prohibited Sunshine from using the access road for overflow parking. Sunshine sought an application for judicial review seeking to quash the decision of the Superintendent to prohibit parking on the access road.
• Our approach: Judicial Review was the only remedy available to the client and we took steps to expedite the process and the hearing to meet the client’s seasonal deadline. That tactic was complemented by a strategy focusing on the failure of the Superintendent to decide taking into account on the key evidence of his own expert.  
• The result: The Court agreed with Field Law’s submission that the decision was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence that was before the Superintendent. The judge quashed the Superintendent’s decision and remitted the matter to the Superintendent to be decided anew and ordered that Sunshine have a full opportunity to be heard on the question of the provision of alternative parking.

ALIA re: Silvia Lapaschuk and Andrew Tanasychuk

• Where we began: As defence counsel, we frequently face allegations that paint a negative picture of the defendant even though there is a good defence. In one such case, the plaintiff was convinced the defendants had defrauded an elderly relative. The relative, who could not read or write, sold land to the defendants for much less than market value, soon before his death.
• Our approach: Our strategy was to focus on the defendants’ good character and relationship with the landowner before the land transfer. In Questioning, the defendants revealed themselves as kind people who would not take advantage of the landowner.
• The result: Despite initial concerns about liability exposure exceeding a million dollars, we were able to settle the case without any payment, based on discontinuance without costs. We negotiated a settlement after the plaintiffs’ counsel questioned the defendants and saw for his own eyes that these were decent people, despite the nature of the allegations against them.